| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Rosa M. Chandler | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr. | Member | |
| Ms. Marla J. N. Troup | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That Item 24, character of service, on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) be changed from "Entry Level Status" to "Honorable" and that she be given the appropriate separation code in Item 26.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that she has been denied Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits because her DD Form 214 is incorrect.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 23 July 1985, she enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for 3 years and training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 71L (Administrative Specialist). Upon completion of basic combat training (BCT) at Fort McClellan, Alabama, she was transferred to Fort Jackson, South Carolina, for advanced individual training (AIT) in MOS 71L.
During her first week of AIT, the applicant was seen by Physical Therapy staff for pain she experienced beginning during the latter part of BCT and resulting in her inability to stand, march or run due to leg pain. An outpatient evaluation included positive findings for stress reaction of the bone at the medial femoral condyles.
On 9 December 1985, the applicant was admitted to the Orthopedic Service at Moncrief Army Community Hospital, Fort Jackson, for evaluation. At that time, the Army initiated a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), an informal proceeding consisting of at least two physicians evaluating the medical history of a soldier and determining how an injury/disease will respond to treatment protocols and, ultimately, if the soldier is fit or unfit for duty. The MEB found the applicant's physical examination was normal except for diffuse tenderness over both knees with no swelling or warmth over the area involved. An antalgic gait (limp) was demonstrated. The neurologic and vascular status of both legs was normal;
x-rays of the lower legs were all within normal limits. A bone scan was positive for stress reaction of the bone at both medial femoral condyles. During the period of her hospitalization, the applicant was placed on a medical profile limiting her to those activities which did not elicit pain in her legs. The MEB recommended that the applicant be referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).
On 13 January 1986, an informal PEB diagnosed the applicant's condition to be "stress reaction(s)/fracture(s), lower extremity (ies); as stated by [MEB], not requiring external aids to ambulation." The applicant was determined to be physically unfit to continue initial training. The PEB recommended a combined disability rating of 20% and separation with severance pay, if otherwise qualified. The applicant concurred with the findings and recommendation of the PEB and waived a formal PEB.
On 18 July 1978, the applicant was separated from the service in an entry-level status under the provisions of paragraph 4-24b(3), Army Regulation (AR) 635-40 by reason of physical disability with severance pay. She was issued a DD Form 214 showing she had completed 6 months and 29 days of active military service and was entitled to severance pay in the amount of $1,432.80, if otherwise authorized. She was assigned a Separation Code (Item 26) of "JFL" and her character of service (Item 24) was shown as "Entry Level Status."
Orders Number 30-1, dated 25 February 1986, Department of the Army, Headquarters, United States Army Medical Department Activity, Fort Jackson, South Carolina, was issued and stated that "effective 21 February 1986, the applicant was authorized disability severance pay, pay grade E-2, 0 years, 6 months and 29 days of active Federal Service. Percentage of disability 20%."
Army Regulation 635-40 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 4-24e(3) of that regulation, in effect at the time, provided for the separation of soldiers with severance pay by reason of physical disability.
Army Regulation 635-5-1 prescribes the specific authorities, reasons for separating soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on DD Form 214. An SPD code of "JFL" applies to RA soldiers separated for physical disability with severance pay under the provisions of paragraph 4-24e(3), AR 635-40.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel and defines entry-level status as the first 180 days of continuous active duty for Regular Army soldiers.
Department of Defense Directive 1332.14, Subject: Enlisted Administrative Separations, states that for the purposes of characterization of service or description of separation, the member's status is determined by the date of notification as to the initiation [emphasis added] of separation proceedings.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
2. The applicant's DD Form 214 is correct. Even though she had 6 months and 29 days of creditable active service, the MEB/PEB process was initiated when she had less than 180 days of active service, thereby rendering her characterization of service as "entry level status." Her SPD code correctly represents her separation by reason of physical disability with severance pay.
3. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__fne___ __hof___ __mjnt__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR20020800085 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030617 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UNCHAR |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19860221 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-40, C4-24E(3) |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059861C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Paragraph 4-24 provides the authority for PERSCOM to separate soldiers for physical disability with severance pay. Paragraph 3-4 states in effect that the service of a soldier who is discharged while in an entry level status will be uncharacterized.
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01179
RATING COMPARISON : ServiceIPEB – Dated 20030221VA -( 2 weeks Pre-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bilateral Medial Tibial Plateau Stress FractureR-5003-5262 L-5003-526210% 0%Stress Fracture, Lt. Medial Tibial Plateau and FemoralCondyle526220%*20030303Bilateral Medial Femoral Condyles Stress FractureCAT IIIStress Fracture, Right. It is noted for the record that the Board is subject to the same laws for disability entitlements as those under which the Disability...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00728
Any conditions or contention not requested in this application, or otherwise outside the Boards defined scope of review, remain eligible for future consideration by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. Left tibial stress fracture with bilateral femoral stress reactions. The L3 profile listed bilateral lower leg stress fractures. The commanders statement indicated complaints of leg pains, noted stress fractures in both lower legs without improvement following being sent...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004649
From 30 March through 1 December 2010, she continued to be seen for related medical complications and was diagnosed throughout this period with "stress fracture of the pelvis," "hip joint pain," "cervicalgia [cervical pain]," "joint pain," and "hip and lower back pain." Her narrative summary (NARSUM) prepared in conjunction with the MEB noted: * bone scan of 17 February 2010 showed stress reaction compression, side of neck and left hip * MRI of lumbar vertebrae on 19 November 2010 showed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006853
Because she was rated less than 30 percent disabled and had less than 20 years of active service, her condition required separation with severance pay in lieu of retirement. Since the VASRD has no rating schedule for these conditions, rating by analogy will be done as follows: (1) If there is X-ray evidence of fracture of the femur or tibia, it should be rated as any other fracture. Operating under different law and its own policies and regulations, the DVA, which has neither the authority...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02015
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bilateral Lower Extremity Stress Reaction w/o Evidence of Fractures5099-50220%Medial Stress Syndrome Tibial Shaft…Right Side52620%20140319Medial Stress...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 00695
No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The PEB adjudicated “multiple stress reactions/healing stress fractures”as unfitting rated20%,with likely application of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditions,left cuboid stress fracture, bilateral medial tibial plateau stress fracture and right femoral shaft stress fracture, were determined to be Category II (contributing to unfit condition). Bone scan on 22 August 2001 demonstrated healing stress...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018014
U.S. Army Physical Evaluation Board, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, letter, dated 27 December 1985, shows the Alternate Board Recorder advised the applicant that the U.S. Army PEB had reevaluated her physical condition and recommended that she be retained on the TDRL with reexamination during the month of January 1987. U.S. Army Physical Evaluation Board, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, letter, dated 9 June 1988, shows the Board Recorder informed the applicant that a formal PEB hearing...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01512
The leg, hipand knee conditions, characterized as “bilateral shin splints,” “right tibial plafond stress reaction,” “bilateral femoral stress reactions,” and “left greater trochanteric bursitis & PFPS [patellofemoral pain syndrome],” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW SECNAVINST 1850.4E. Bilateral Leg PainCondition (includes Bilateral Shin Splints,Bilateral Femoral Stress Reactions, Left Greater Trochanteric Bursitis, and Left PFPS) :The narrative summary, 4 months...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012195
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 October 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080012195 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect, at the time, established RE code 4 as the proper reentry code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, paragraph 4-24e(3) for disability, severance pay. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from...